Awful: Giuliani not running for Senate in New York

posted at 8:15 pm on December 21, 2009 by Allahpundit

Former Mayor Rudy Giuliani is expected to announce Tuesday he is not running for U.S. Senate or anything else in 2010, effectively ending his storied – and often stormy – electoral career, The Daily News has learned…

Ironically, however, Giuliani’s decision not to run will almost certainly benefit the Democratic Gillibrand more than anyone.

The former mayor’s step back all but assures that the freshman Gillibrand, appointed earlier this year by Gov. Paterson to fill Secretary of State Clinton’s old seat, will not face any big-name GOPers.

“Her path is now cleared,” enthused one Democratic operative…

Had Giuliani run for Senate, all his scandalous baggage – which includes his former top cop, Bernard Kerik, who last month pleaded guilty to accepting home renovations from a mobbed up contractor – would have been unpacked again.

Yes, all his scandalous baggage — which has been public knowledge for years and years and yet he still led Gillibrand by double digits in three separate polls over the past month. You’re never going to get an environment better suited for a GOP pick-up in New York than next year: Gillibrand’s largely unknown, the national mood is anti-Democratic, and there’s a challenger available with national name recognition who’s largely in line with New Yorkers on social issues. A Rudy win would have given the party a foothold again in the northeast and a voice with a Senate megaphone to challenge Obama on detainee issues, for starters. And of course it would have undercut the media stereotype that the GOP is a small tent that’s dominated now by tea partiers and the like. All that, up in smoke.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Comments

Look, nobody in New York outside of Nassau County knew who Al D’Amato was when he won election for the Senate in 1980 on the coattails of the Reagan landslide (and the Republicans taking over control of the Senate). And no one outside of Poughkeepsie knew who George Pataki was when he defeated Mario Cuomo for governor as part of the Republican landslide nationally in 1994.Having a superstar/high profile candidate would certainly help, but if the state GOP can get its heads out of its collective orifices, past history has shown they can still win in New York during years that are favorable nationally for Republicans, even if they nominate only half-decent canidates.

Gillibrand, Cuomo/Patterson and Schumer still have to defend not only the Democrats’ work in NYS, but also nationally, because other than the ‘blame Bush’ strategy, there’s no Republican higher-up at the federal level state Dems can blame for their problems.

Rudy was the one person I hoped would run against Chuckie Schumer’s shadow, Gillibrand. Pataki doesn’t have the star power for a successful bid against a powerful democratic machine that will fight mercilessly for Gillibrand. Rick Lazio couldn’t win the gubernatorial race if he pulled a Scary Harry Reid by bribing every single New Yorker with five thousand bucks each.

New York has elected a few centrist Republicans in the past, chiefly because centrists are more palatable to moderate Dems. If a Repub wins in virtually any district, it’s typically a RINO. The state split between the parties is approximately 5.5 million Dems to 3.1 million Repubs, which may explain the tendency for New Yorkers to vote for RINO’s, if they vote for a Repub at all.

That said, a conservative candidate, with an upbeat personality, moxie, and superior linguistic skills could beat Gillibrand. Given the economic mood and the disillusionment many New Yorkers currently feel since the Eliot Spitzer scandal, and because of our hopelessly ridiculous and inept current Governor David Paterson, a solid conservative candidate could win. I hope this isn’t just wishful thinking.

Like I said, nobody in December 1979 could have told you who D’Amato was outside of his home area. And no one outside of Pataki’s home area in December of 1993 had any idea who he was either. But both won in years when the Democrats controlled the White House, controlled the U.S. House and controlled the U.S. Senate, which left the party with no higher up evil Republicans to blame for their own craptacularness.

A currently low-profile Republican who doesn’t have a Scozzafava-like voting record and is even a halfway decent campaigner has a chance in the current environment because while it may seem so at times, New York State is not New York City, reflexively pulling the ‘D’ lever no matter what they do while in office (and even New York City isn’t as batshirt crazy as, say, San Francisco, and the outer boroughs do have areas that won’t vote Democratic next November if the Republicans give them any sort of decent option).

He’s too busy getting rich off of dictators and other heads of state. Have a disaster happen in your city, have the cleanup crew get sick from breathing in toxic air and you are rewarded with a lucrative consulting business.

Substantively, you’re right. We have a fighting chance if the Repub brass can identify someone with integrity, conservative ideals, a solid voting record, and at least half a personality. The problem is, our fighting chance is predicated on the Repubs actually selecting a candidate who isn’t a complete loser.

I haven’t read the thread so if I am repeating another person’s point, sorry, but could he be afraid of some backlash from Bernard Kerik. I am not suggesting that he was involved but you know the Dems would link the mayor to him. It’s sad though, I would like to see him in either the office.

Doing it with Rubio/Crist
Doing it with Devore/F woman
Screwing it up that is.

Does Soros pay everybody in D.C.
I guess there are only 545 of them….that is chicken feed…It is our money after all….Soros has bought em’ all….thanks John Cornyn have fun cashing your check….you too Kay Bailey…..oh, I forgot Coburn, McLame, Graham all think Obama is a great guy…..Soros money must be really good

First, the paper is “reporting” that Rudy is “expected” to make the announcement. He hasn’t said anything publicly.

Second, assuming he did get elected in a blue state, the Senate is no place for someone of his abilities. He would be effectively neutralized by that sack o’ dung Schumer, and would have to spend too much time watching the Dems — and yes, I’m sorry to say I expect to see them keep their majority in ’10 — doing there destructive bit without having any way to combat them.

A Cabinet position in the next administration, or a similar post where Rudy’s decision-making (and personal) skills can be put to maximum use would be far better.

It is disappointing because, although many are willing to pin that overused RINO tag on almost anyone nowadays, Rudy was Ronald Reagan compared to anyone who stood a chance of winning a NY senatorial seat. And we could have used that. He may be to the left of me on some issues, but I have no doubt that if he were seated in Congress today, the Obamacare bill would have been defeated.

But it is curious that Rudy will not run for a seat he most certainly would have won. And I am dying to know why he won’t. Don’t think he has another health issue. Don’t think he was deterred by the thought of old dirt being shown new light. Perhaps he is making so much money now he can bear the thought of a senatorial paycheck (although I doubt this). I suspect that if Rudy was to run, there would have been another scandal involving his personal life. A mistress perhaps. Perhaps even some sort of unscrupulous financial dealing.

I am weeping for the future of conservatism. I had thought that Hot Air had a lot more intelligent commentators, but I’m seeing the conservative equivalents of the DUmmies.

Red Cloud on December 21, 2009 at 10:49 PM

You’re right. After all, having an R behind Collin’s name has worked so well so far. Ya, ya, you get committees. So what? What good does it do when you have people who happen to have an R behind their name are liberal?

It reminds me of Romney refusing to run for a second term as governor of Massachusetts because 1) it would be hard work, 2) people would criticize him, 3) there was *gasp* some chance he might lose, and 4) it didn’t fit well with the rest of their personal agenda (a Presidential run for Romney, apparently a boatload more money for Giuliani). Never mind that it screws your party, your state and the people that supported you.

This is annoying if true. What the hell Rudy? Take what is yours, the only 2 reasons I can think of you not running is that you make too much money in the private sector or there is a scandal we don’t know about. Rest assured that if you don’t run, curious reporters will be looking into the latter so it would be exposed either way.

Gillibrand is an absolute joke and is beatable but I have heard of no potential candidates yet. No Giuliani, no Kink and no Pataki? Maybe Lazio will decide to run, he might have a chance, but it would have been so easy to take out Gillibrand with Rudy that money could have been saced and spent on other closer races.

NY GOP, find an actual conservative to beat the current junior senator. Don’t NY-23 us all over again.

Guess what? The only one we have is Giuliani. Imagine that.

Run a social conservative in New York and all they’re going to do is lose. However, faced with the option of a liberal Democrat and a fiscal conservative, it seems some people here are preferring the liberal Democrat.

You’re right. After all, having an R behind Collin’s name has worked so well so far. Ya, ya, you get committees. So what? What good does it do when you have people who happen to have an R behind their name are liberal?

boomer on December 21, 2009 at 11:03 PM

Keep calling Giuliani and people like him liberals. Go ahead. You’ll get the real McCoy instead – aka more of what we’ve already got in Washington. Then you’ll stamp your feet, and I’ll… well, I’ll be too depressed to say “I told you so.”

Guess what? The only one we have is Giuliani. Imagine that.
Run a social conservative in New York and all they’re going to do is lose. However, faced with the option of a liberal Democrat and a fiscal conservative, it seems some people here are preferring the liberal Democrat.

Red Cloud on December 22, 2009 at 12:48 AM

Oh, you already asked Doug Hoffman? 2nd largest state in the Union, and you only got 1 guy in your outfit? Who do you think you’re kidding? Why would you even try that? A liberal Republican works with Democrats. No more liberal Republicans. If all you got is liberals then you’re sure to lose, because we got an interest in seeing your liberals lose.

Keep calling Giuliani and people like him liberals. Go ahead. You’ll get the real McCoy instead – aka more of what we’ve already got in Washington. Then you’ll stamp your feet, and I’ll… well, I’ll be too depressed to say “I told you so.”
Red Cloud on December 22, 2009 at 12:49 AM

Did that “fiscal conservative” EVER say “whoa, New York doesn’t need all that federal money” one time, ever?

This Giuliani decision makes me concerned for his general health. Giuliani has aged significantly within the past year, a simple observation. I wish him well, and am sorry for his apparent reticence to campaign for himself. But perhaps he must retire from center stage, while still applying his influence to bear sway.

Oh, you already asked Doug Hoffman? 2nd largest state in the Union, and you only got 1 guy in your outfit? Who do you think you’re kidding? Why would you even try that? A liberal Republican works with Democrats. No more liberal Republicans. If all you got is liberals then you’re sure to lose, because we got an interest in seeing your liberals lose.

Chris_Balsz on December 22, 2009 at 1:11 AM

A local race, which is what NY-23 was, is NOT the same as a statewide race.

Guess what? In order for a Republican to win in New York, they have to be able to take a chunk of votes in New York City. Like it or not, that’s the way things operate here. Why did Doug Hoffman have a chance in NY-23? BECAUSE HE DIDN’T HAVE TO WIN VOTES DOWNSTATE. It’s not rocket science.

So basically, when given the choice between Giuliani and Gillibrand, you pick Gillibrand.

Republicans and Conservatives will do just fine, thank you, without a Rudy Giuliani playing the Brett Favre role every couple of years. Tends to get in the way of developing political talent, you know.

Besides, Rudy is a bigger person than the position of US Senate, anyway. Like Sarah Palin, Rudy can only go for the elected office of POTUS.

Republicans and Conservatives will do just fine, thank you, without a Rudy Giuliani playing the Brett Favre role every couple of years. Tends to get in the way of developing political talent, you know.

OK, then. Find me someone in New York who can run and win, therefore helping bring down the number of liberals in the Senate. I’ll wait.

The NYSGOP is so far removed from political power in NY State right now that it probably wouldn’t hurt the young talent to start from the SocCon baseline. As long as they get SOME experience running for office.

Again, the real goal right now isn’t a quick win. It’s getting experience in running for higher office, and learning some of the political (don’t confuse with ideological) tricks of the trade from the other side.

The GOP in the rest of the country will capably hold things in place while the NYSGOP gets its young talent in place.

He’s the only one that can win, yes. And, as I keep telling you brick walls, he governs as a conservative. He’s not overturning Roe, so what does it matter what his stance on abortion is? Did you know abortion rates fell faster in NYC than anywhere else in the country during his tenure as Mayor? No? Oh, but don’t bring that up. HE’S A LIBERAL!

Seriously, it’s people like you that are the reason that we’re looking at 60 Senators jamming ObamaCare down our throats. I’m all about having standards for what we call conservatives (Dede Scozzafava was NOT acceptable), but if Giuliani, given a real, careful look at his overall record isn’t good enough to fit your mold, then we’re never going to get ANY conservative values coming out of the Northeast in statewide races. So you’re telling me that you prefer outright liberals to mostly conservatives? Yes, I do blame you for ObamaCare.

BradSchwartze, I understand what you’re getting at, but US Senate isn’t a place where people should be “getting experience in running for higher office.” It’s not where you grow your “farm team.” The goal needs to be to get young talent in place in the counties and in Congress (Doug Hoffman being a fine example for his location in the state), and they just don’t have that right now. Meanwhile, we’ve got a guy, on the bench, who would probably win for the Senate. Yes, I am disappointed that he isn’t running, but really, seriously, there’s no one left. Sending up one of these young neophytes to run against Gillibrand only to lose is not doing them any favors for their future in electoral politics.

They aren’t awful ideas, but they aren’t winning ideas either. Kelly was defeated for re-election in ’06, and KT, although I like her a lot, can’t beat Gillibrand because she can’t pick up enough votes in NYC.

They aren’t awful ideas, but they aren’t winning ideas either. Kelly was defeated for re-election in ‘06, and KT, although I like her a lot, can’t beat Gillibrand because she can’t pick up enough votes in NYC.
Red Cloud on December 22, 2009 at 10:56 AM

Let me state this very clearly for those who think in terms of gaining or keeping a seat: New York’s 23rd CD will become Republican again. In the form of Utah’s 4th CD. Or, in the form of Georgia’s 14th CD. Or in the form of Arizona’s 9th CD. All of these will happen in the next reapportionment.

There are plenty of places where the GOP can get seats in the House or the Senate while the New York state GOP rebuilds itself.